...long time ago in a faraway place philosophers worried about the distinction between the one and the many. Architecture is about relationship, which requires the many. Architecture has components. Design is about content, which requires the one. Design has properties, qualities, characteristics. We typically think that design is within architecture. Dualistic thinking gives the many as primordial. But architecture is also within design. It's all how we choose to view what is before us - the one or the many.

在SDLC(软件开发生命周期)的一些描述中，它们是可互换的，但共识是它们是不同的。它们同时是:不同的(1)阶段，(2)责任领域，(3)决策层次。

架构是更大的图景:框架、语言、范围、目标和高级方法(Rational、瀑布式、敏捷等)的选择。 设计是更小的画面:如何组织代码的计划;系统不同部分之间的契约将会是怎样的;项目方法和目标的持续实施。规范是在这个阶段编写的。

由于不同的原因，这两个阶段似乎融合在一起。

Smaller projects often don't have enough scope to separate out planning into these to stages. A project might be a part of a larger project, and hence parts of both stages are already decided. (There are already existing databases, conventions, standards, protocols, frameworks, reusable code, etc.) Newer ways of thinking about the SDLC (see Agile methodologies) somewhat rearrange this traditional approach. Design (architecture to a lesser extent) takes place throughout the SDLC on purpose. There are often more iterations where the whole process happens over and over. Software development is complicated and difficult to plan anyway, but clients/managers/salespeople usually make it harder by changing goals and requirements mid-stream. Design and even architectural decisions must bemade later in the project whether that is the plan or not.

Even if the stages or areas of responsibility blend together and happen all over the place, it is always good to know what level of decision-making is happening. (We could go on forever with this. I'm trying to keep it a summary.) I'll end with: Even if it seems your project has no formal architectural or design stage/AOR/documentaiton, it IS happening whether anyone is consciously doing it or not. If no one decides to do architecture, then a default one happens that is probably poor. Ditto for design. These concepts are almost more important if there are no formal stages representing them.

建筑与设计密切相关;它们之间的主要区别在于我们面对的方向。 建筑面向战略、结构和目的，面向抽象。 设计面向实现与实践，面向具体。

设计:了解模块，模块之间的关系，每个模块的功能，类及其成员函数，每个模块之间通信的接口。

体系结构:体系结构是软件系统的整个结构。所有模块、类和组件执行不同的任务，并将给出唯一的结果。

例如:有一个有5个房间的房子。还有附属浴室。厨房也在家里。所以家里有不同的东西这些东西之间有不同的关系。所以这一切都是关于一个家的“设计”。

而当你从房子外面看的时候，你看到的整个结构都是关于建筑的。

建筑是战略的，而设计是战术的。

架构包括框架、工具、编程范例、基于组件的软件工程标准和高级原则。

而设计是一种与局部约束有关的活动，例如设计模式、编程习惯用语和重构。

我喜欢Roy Thomas Fielding在他的论文中对什么是软件架构的定义和解释: 架构风格与基于网络的软件架构设计

软件体系结构是软件系统在其操作的某个阶段的运行时元素的抽象。一个系统可能由许多抽象层次和许多操作阶段组成，每一个都有自己的软件体系结构。

他强调“运行时元素”和“抽象层次”。